There were a few bright moments when I touched upon a topic that caught some attention, but for the most part, my writing has simply been an expression of my opinions and ideas. I’ve discovered, writing is more important than being read.

Writing, For Me

A blog is like writing a diary or a book. It is meant to a personal statement. Someday, my children or my children’s children may read it and know more about me. I find comfort in that thought.

My articles became less frequent in the last few years, but recently I have experienced a rebirth of writing. I suspect that my sleep apnea may be one of the issues causing the decline in writing. My brain was starved of oxygen and sleep every night for many years. Now that I am being treated for it, my cognitive functions seem to be reengaging.

Writing a blog has improved my communication skills, and has helped me organize my thoughts. This, this thing I’m doing, is an unfinished novel about the world from one perspective. I’m not a great writer, but I’m better than I was eight years ago.

For the last month, I have been publishing a new article every day. I don’t know that I will keep up that pace, but it is forcing my brain to think, and that is the goal.

Rebranding My Writing

I have decided to rename my blog. First, the term ‘blog’ has developed a negative meaning to many people, so I needed to drop the term. Second, my last name is not as relevant as it was a year ago, before I discovered that biologically, I am not a ‘Kiser.’

I tried several title ideas but finally settled on PAULx talks. It is the 2.0 version of Paul Kiser’s Blog. I don’t have a destination in mind for my writing. I never have, but I’ll see where this takes me.

The idea or suggestion lacked thought or had no basis in fact. (e.g.; Would Donald Trump be a good President?)

The idea or suggestion has obvious flaws. (e.g.; Should we let a gun be in a room with a bunch of 2nd grade children?)

Is a matter of personal opinion or seeks personal approval. (e.g.; Would you go out with me?)

But when an idea or suggestion doesn’t fall under any of these categories, the “no” answer becomes a potential weapon of personal destruction for the person saying it, and a beautiful opportunity for the person on the receiving end.

Being the youngest of four boys, my brothers and parents became accustomed to telling me ‘no.’ I was constantly asking questions and making suggestions, and the ‘yes’ answer was likely to encourage me. In those situations where I actually had a good idea, it was enough that as the youngest member of the family, a ‘no’ answer was valid.

As an adult, I never had any expectations that my ideas and suggestions would be better received, so hearing ‘no’ was an irritation, but I accepted it as part of life.

However, I as grew older I noticed that some people seemed to enjoy telling other people ‘no.’ Often these people were in leadership positions and their tactic was to dominate and/or intimidate others. In some cases people would act as a dictator within the organization, silencing the ideas and opinions of others with a type of ‘no’ answer that implied dire consequences if the person didn’t drop the subject, or the idea was treated so lightly as if the person was unintelligent for making the suggestion. For years I thought that part of being a good manager was to have the privilege and responsibility to tell others, “NO!”

Then several years ago I joined a service club and became very involved in the organization. I served on several Boards and committees. I discovered that I could manipulate some people because I always knew their response to whatever I suggested would be, ‘no.’

It was then I realized that when someone says ‘no,’ it is a gift. The “No-ee” has done all they are required by making the suggestion or asking the question. The “No-er” has put their reputation and respectability on the line. The ‘no’ answer gives them all the responsibility, and, as a situation plays out, their failure to consider someone else’s idea or suggestion may be the fatal decision that brings them down.

I still find enjoyment of sometimes asking a perfectly legitimate question of someone I know will give me a ‘no’ answer. It is even more interesting to do this when I have more information about the issue or situation than they do and they can’t help but give me an answer that will eventually haunt them.

Still, I have learned that organizations and relationships with ‘no’ people are typically doomed. There’s a time to experience the joy of ‘no,’ and then there are times it’s best to walk away and shake the dust off your sandals.

I have had a few instances of being told I was right. These typically come years after the fact when the acknowledgement is almost meaningless regarding the original idea, issue, or choice. The irony is that the issue discussed years ago is irrelevant, but how the person responded to my idea or concern established the quality of our relationship.

Years of interactions with people through work, social, and personal experiences has taught me that relationships are defined by the quality of respect the two people have for each other. Communication is about sharing information and being correct or not about an issue is secondary to the quality of the relationship. We are not taught that in school, but it is something learned as patterns develop with the people in our social circles.

The way a person responds to our ideas and concerns defines the quality of respect they have for who we are as a person, and that defines the relationship.

Dismissive ResponseA dismissive response is the lowest form of respect to a person. Adults often are dismissive of children, and that is a valid description of the relationship between two adults when one is dismissive or condescending to another person. The classic, “Let’s just agree to disagree” is a great example of a dismissive response. If this is happening in a work relationship it means that your value to that person is nonexistent and that you should be seeking a different work environment.

In a personal relationship it means that you are a pet or child to the person and you should take action to get them out of your life. Once a person treats you as an inferior, others will model that and everyone around you will devalue your relationship with them.

Deflective ResponseThe next lowest form of respect is when someone is deflective or derogatory to you when you express concern about an issue. This behavior can be recognized by responses that begin with or include the following:

The point here is that the person is not responding to your concern, just devaluing you and anything you have to say. It is a close cousin to a dismissive response, but the person feels a need to answer your concern, even though the answer is actually an insult to your intelligence.

Illogical ResponseAnother close relative of the Dismissive Response is the Illogical Response. It is the type of response that has the appearance of a discussion of two people who mutually respect each other; however, the response is often a desperate attempt to suggest Point A is negated by Point B, but in reality Point A has nothing to do with Point B.

An example of this is if Ryan is saying that a school’s quality is on the decline because some of the best teachers in a school are leaving and Barbara counters by saying the school has a great reputation for the quality of education. Barbara’s argument is based on past performance, but Evan’s argument is talking about current and future performance.

Respectful DiscussionThe hallmark of any valid discussion is the respect the people involved have for each other. When both people respect each other every attempt will be made to reach a reasonable solution because the relationship is more important than the argument.

Finally, when someone comes back to you years after a discussion and tells you that you were correct, it really is about admitting the lack of respect they had for you, and they are attempting to recognize their error. Never assume that they have found a new respect for you because respect is not a quality that returns once it has been lost.

Last week I offered my thoughts about Re-Imagining Rotary. That was the first part of what I wanted to say.

Early in 2010 I wrote an article about ‘Dissatisfiers.’ The point of the article was to suggest that before a decision to make a significant life change (switch to a competitor, quit a job, or leave an organization, etc.) a person has typically will have experienced a series of negative events with the company or organization that sets the stage for them to make that decision. In the end, the reason for making a change is about the series of dissatisfiers, not a single event.

I now have arrived at that place with Rotary. While the final decision to leave Rotary was reached in the last week or so, the stage has been set for me to leave for some time. The final reason is simple. Rotary no longer offers the satisfaction it once did and that is largely due to an ongoing series of smaller, but significant, dissatisfying experiences.

However, I still have great admiration for Rotary and many of the great people who are a part of this organization. The concept of Rotary is a brilliant one. It is place where business professionals from all trades and industries can meet, share ideas, and help to build better communities by donating their vocational skills. It is an organization that we sorely needed in a world that has become increasing motivated by selfish and unethical desires.

Rotary is an organization with the most crystal clear guiding principles of any organization I have ever known. The Four-Way Test is a standard that brings morality to any situation or person. The Test is simple:

First, is it the truth

Second, is it fair to all concerned

Third, will it build goodwill and better friendships

Fourth, will it be beneficial to all concerned

We would have no need for government oversight of any business endeavor if the legal standard was the Four-Way Test. To be certain, not every Rotarian, including those in a leadership position, abides by the Four-Way Test everyday. It is a difficult, and somewhat unnatural, philosophy to maintain. But just the attempt brings honor to those who try.

What I discovered in Rotary was that many of those who were members were among the best of the best in the business world. If the founder of Rotary, Paul Harris, were alive today I would love the opportunity to introduce him to some of the people who served as great examples of what it now means to be a Rotarian. I would find people like Mike Hix who was President of the Rotary Club of Sparks, (Nevada, USA,) the year I was inducted. Mr. Harris would be well pleased with Mike and what he has done for his club, his community, and his Zone.

There are thousands of examples of great Rotarians who have made the world a better place and are working hard to keep Rotary relevant in a rapidly evolving new world of business and I am honored I have had the opportunity to work beside just a few of them in the last 9 1/2 years.

But Rotary faces a huge challenge in the next few years. Because of Rotary’s close attachment to the business world, the organization is mired in same traditions of hierarchical structures and slow responsiveness to change that currently plague many American industries. Younger professionals typically ignore and/or bypass most of the traditional business concepts of leadership and organizational structure that restrict change, which is why many young professionals find Rotary outdated. That is why Rotary’s future lies in its ability to adjust to the expectations of younger professionals.

Can Rotary overcome challenges it faces? It will because it has to, and I will cheer on those who make it happen. Thank you to Rotary and to those who cheered me on for most of this last decade.

In 2003, Tom Peters wrote Re-Imagine! Business Excellence in a Disruptive Age. In that book, Mr. Peters takes a visionary look at business and our culture that confronts the traditional…and remarkably stupid concepts of the modern working world. His words have foretold many of the new realities we see unfolding around us.

Recently I have had to face up to some hard realities about Rotary. Rotary is a great organization, but the organization is being held back by an old skin that needs to be shed. Rotary’s membership issues cannot be solved unless RI’s President Ray Klinginsmith’s suggestion of ‘keep what works and drop what doesn’t,’ is absorbed into the organization’s DNA. It’s time we Re-Imagined Rotary, so I will offer up my view of what I would change about Rotary to re-vitalize the organization from bottom to top.

Rotary International (RI)Club Members should be RI members. Currently Clubs are members of RI, but the Rotarians in the clubs are not. I’m sure there is a rational legal reason for the wall of separation and I know the history, but there is a negative symbol created by the divide between Rotarians and the parent organization.

Council on Legislation (CoL) should be abolished and organizational changes taken directly to Clubs. Currently the Council on Legislation meets once every three years. In a world of rapid change and flattening of hierarchical structure, the CoL is a dinosaur. A significant problem with the CoL is that to be a representative you must be a Past District Governor, and while we have some very smart and forward-thinking Past District Governors, we also have some Past District Governors who see themselves as Cardinal’s in the Church of Traditional Thinking. Change needs to come from the Clubs and a handful of amendments could be presented to the clubs on a monthly basis for voting via the Internet. Discussions for and against the amendments could be made via linked blogs.

Decentralize most of RI. Face-to-face contact is valuable, but often an organization’s headquarters develops a ‘bunker mentality’ which does not serve in the best interest of the whole. VoIP phones, the Internet and webinars can bring people around the world together as well as people in cubicles, in fact, often the Internet tools do a better job in creating an environment of sharing ideas.

Every RI employee has to be a Club member. I don’t know if this is currently required or not, but my feeling is that the paid staff of RI can serve the organization of better if they see Rotary from the viewpoint of being a Club member.

Zone and DistrictEliminate the PDG monopoly. Rotary has a wealth of knowledgeable people but all the significant discussions and decisions are made behind doors labeled, “Past District Governors ONLY.” It is not a system of decision-making that brings all the talent to the table. Some of my best friends are PDG’s and I have great admiration for what all of them have contributed to the organization; however, when tackling a problem such as years of declining membership, the people who have dedicated themselves to Rotary and have been rewarded with significant prestige of office, may not be the best people to address why others don’t ‘get’ Rotary.

All Zone and District Leaders must write blogs. Rotary is great in sending out emails and finding people to speak at meetings, but the organization is still in the dark ages when it comes to communicating. Emails just fill up the Inbox and get buried among all the other emails. The concept of ‘just-in-time’ information is not well understood in Rotary. Blogs put information that is Google searchable and readily available when someone needs it. Blogs can offer information, ask questions, or begin a discussion. Blogs allow each club to absorb the information at their own pace.

Zone and District Leaders are consultants, not Lords. This really isn’t a problem for most Zone and District Leaders because most of them approach their position as a consultant for the organization; however, we still have a few leaders who are insulted when some insolent Rotarian suggests a different concept or idea from their own. I have a list of them in our District, and I know I’m on their list.

District Conference and Assembly to be held on the same weekend. It is such a basic idea to increase participation, give respect to the member’s time, and improve the value of both functions that it shouldn’t be an issue, yet it is vehemently opposed by some Past District Governors.

ClubsNo Club to be chartered without a website. Today, no business or non-profit is taken seriously as a legitimate organization unless they have a website. Any club that wishes to be chartered should start with a website for the provisional club to answer questions, inform, and create methods of contact with the organizers of the club. Once a club is formed the website becomes the 24/7/365 presence for the club. It is so basic to survival it has to be mandatory.

Club member immersion in Social Media. Rotary has always been about creating connections between people and Social Media is the greatest tool ever invented to do exactly that. It is not about one Social Media savvy member creating a Facebook page, but about all members logging in and using the page. All committee meetings, announcements, social events, and projects should be posted on a Facebook page by the person in charge of that activity. The fear that many of our members have about Social Media is a telling indicator of how quickly Rotary is falling out of the real world.

Absolute adherence to the no religion and no politics policy established in the Constitution. Rotary is an organization of business professionals and that should be our public image. Unfortunately, some clubs have a public image of being a sub-organization of a certain religion or a certain political view. If people want to join a church or a political party they can and will, but Rotary is not a place for members to further their personal religious or political beliefs.

A greater focus on Vocational development. Rotary should be a place where smart business people get smarter. Incorporating business seminars into to Club meetings and District Conferences should be standard practice. Rotarians can and should be experts in the latest technology, management and business practices. Some clubs do this, many do not.

Clubs must have a significant focus on the inclusion of family members. Our organization tends to ignore business professionals with children because we have so many members without children. Many Club social activities don’t involve ‘kid and/or teen-friendly’ activities. The status quo is a great way to keep Rotary’s membership in decline.

Club members must be interconnected with other Area clubs. In any community all Rotary clubs should offer a united and coordinated front. I think Rotary is getting better about creating connections between clubs, but this connection should go deeper than just the Club Presidents. Every club member should recognize that they are part of a larger force in their community that includes all Rotary clubs. Good natured competition is great, but petty rivalries between local clubs should be dealt with immediately by District and Area Leadership.

Do or Die Time I am absolutely convinced that Rotary driving towards a cliff. We either have to make a major change in direction or we will go off the cliff. We are being eaten alive by a monster that is consuming our will to change. We either confront the monster or we die.

Rotary played a major role in my life for the last 9 1/2 years and I have come to appreciate the beauty that arose out of a simple concept of business professionals joining forces for good. I have a profound respect for what Paul Harris created with this simple concept but I fear that he would be very anxious about the fact that Rotary has failed to attract young professionals in most clubs. For Paul Harris and the good of all Rotarians, Rotary must change. It is time to Re-Imagine Rotary and shed the old skin that encumbers the organization.

As mentioned in the first part of this article, I have defined three factors that seem to determine the quality of my relationships. 1)Trust, 2)Common Interests and/or Experiences, 3)Equality.

By using a 21-point scale to rate each factor in various relationship types we can see how Trust (or the lack of), Common Interests and/or Experiences (or the lack of), and Equality (or the lack of) define the relationship. Below are seven types of benchmark relationships and how they might affect membership retention in a Rotary club.

Too much friendship?

The Star We all have people who we look up to, but there are just a few people that we put on a pedestal. I see the Star relationship as one where the trust level is relatively high (+7 on a scale of -10 to +10) as well as the common interest level (+8 on a scale of -10 to +10), but we feel inferior (a -9 on a scale of -10 to +10) to this person. In this relationship the depth and quality of the relationship is usually shallow. These people are not close friends, but rather an admired acquaintance. A new member in a Rotary club might see the Club President as the Star.

The Mentor The Mentor is a different version of the Star. The difference is that we trust the Mentor implicitly (+10) and we have a strong common interest (+9); however, we see ourselves as inferior (-6) to our Mentor. The Mentor has achieved a level of success that we hope reach and our relationship is based on a mutual effort to gain an equal level of success in the future. I think it is a mistake to believe that a Mentor relationship can be imposed. The only successful Mentor relationships I have observed are those that have occurred by a mutual agreement of both parties. In over nine years in Rotary have witnessed few successful Mentor relationships. When it does happen it is a win-win situation for both members, but the Mentor must be highly skilled and/or knowledgeable, a passionate person, and a great trainer. In addition, the ‘trainee’ must recognize the Mentor’s superior knowledge and have a desire to learn from him or her. If not, the relationship will fail.

A Partnership is not necessarily a friendship

The Partner I see the Partner as a relationship seeking mutual benefit for both people, but without the level of trust of a Mentor relationship. In a Partner relationship the trust is conditional (0, not + or -) and the two people usually see the other as his or her equal (0) or at least they have something of value that balances the relationship, but the common interest is high (+9). I would consider the Partner relationship to be a symbiotic or co-dependent relationship and while the relationship may seem to be a strong bond, the slightest feeling of inequality or betrayal can end the relationship. In Part I of this series I mentioned that the employer/employee relationship might be a partnership, but I also believe that some marriages can start out, or devolve into Partner type relationships. In a Rotary club a member who has established mostly Partner relationships with other members is likely to have no deep attachment to the club and likely to leave.

The Friend Of all relationships, I think a Friend is the hardest to achieve. A quality friendship involves a high level of trust (+9) and a significant level of common interests and/or experiences (+6), but also a genuine feeling of equality (0) must exist. The trust and equality factors for a friendship are difficult for most people to offer to another person. It is a special relationship and one to be highly valued, but once achieved it is a strong bond that lasts over time and distance. If every member were to have only one other true ‘Friend’ in his or her club most members would never consider leaving.

The Rival or Competitor A rival is a relationship, even though we usually don’t think of it as one. It is a relationship based on mistrust (-8) of another person and somewhat ironically, a relationship that includes a high level of common interests (+8). I think that while we may feel we are superior to our rival that the truth is that we are afraid that we are not, thus I give an equality rating of (+3) to a Rival relationship. The Rival relationship is one of the worst possible relationships that could develop in a Rotary club. Sooner or later the club is going to be drawn into the conflict or one or more members will leave because of it. Ironically, it is the high level of common interest that seems to set up the Rival/Competitor situation. Without the envy or jealousy caused by the common interest both people would probably ignore each other.

Common Interest can enhance a relationship, or create conflict

The Subordinate or Submissive Note that with the Subordinate relationship I am talking about someone who sees another person as their subordinate or submissive. This can be an employer/employee type relationship, but it is any relationship where a person sees him/herself as superior (+10) to another person. The trust level is relatively high (+5) as the person with the bigger ego expects the subordinate to obey their wishes and typically there is somewhat of a common interest (+3), but not necessarily a significant level of commonality. The big problem I have seen with this type of relationship is that the target of this attitude may not feel that they should be the subordinate. In a Rotary club it is surprising easy for a club leader to see other club members as their subordinate. Nothing creates a false sense of power like a title and in a volunteer organization titles are meant to assign responsibility, not authority, but not everyone understands that concept.

The Alien or Blank It seems somewhat pointless to talk about the lack of a relationship as a type of relationship, but the I find it interesting to understand that some people just don’t show up on our relationship radar even though we may see them on a regular basis. I didn’t fully understand this until I was in Rotary, but after a few years in a club you learn the some people can disappear in plain sight. I feel the lack of a relationship, when there realistically should be is a type of relationship and I refer to it as an Alien or Blank relationship.

The quality of Friendship I would not argue the point that it takes two to make or break a relationship; however, I would argue that the quality and depth of any relationship is determined largely by our own attitudes, in concert with the way the other person treats us. Understanding the factors that influence a relationship is the first step to making positive changes. In a Rotary club, failing to recognize that not all relationships are constructive can have major consequences on membership retention.

In Part I of this series I talked about a facilitator at a meeting who didn’t want to dilute his ‘friendships’ with people in the Social Media. My response to him is this: friendship is more about what we bring to the table and not the method of connection. The Social Media is not a threat to good friendships, just a different way to engage in them.

Several weeks ago I was at a Rotary District Leadership training meeting and I made a comment that the Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter allow us to have more friends and more connections to other people. I was shocked into silence when one of the facilitators said that he didn’t want that. He explained that his friends were those very close, very special people that he choose to be friends with, and that he didn’t want to dilute his social circle with people from the Social Media.

It was an interesting point and it caused me to start thinking about the quality and depth of the relationships of the people around me. In several decades of business, procurement of two bachelor’s degrees, and almost a decade in Rotary I have learned that not everyone is my ‘friend’ even though I may have frequent contact with them. All of us have people who are important to us and we all have people who we just don’t like, but until now I hadn’t focused on the factors that seem to define my relationships.

Understanding what shapes my attitude is a significant step towards taking an active role in building better and less conflictive relationships with the people around me. For this reason I wanted to explore what determines what type of relationship we have with another person.

I have come up with three factors that seem to determine the quality of my relationships. 1) Trust, 2) Common Interests and/or Experiences, 3) Equality.

Trust, Common Interest, and Equality

The trust factor seems obvious, but I find this to be a complex issue. Trust can be absolute, non-existent, or conditional. For example, I would propose that many employer/employee relationships are based on a conditional trust where both parties are on the constant guard of the other person betraying his or her trust.

The common interest and/or experiences factor may also seem obvious; however, sometimes common interests or experiences can create feelings of jealousy, envy, rivalry, or disgust. Just because two people have a lot in common doesn’t result in a bond of appreciation.

The final factor is not as obvious. My experience is that the level of equality felt by a person is a significant factor in determining the quality and depth of a relationship. In an organization of volunteers like a Rotary club we often mistakenly believe that everyone is equal, but my experience has been that the relationships that form in a typical Rotary club are often shaped, at least in part, by one person’s feeling of superiority over another.

Using these three factors I have been able to better define the quality and depth of my relationships. Because each of these factors have a positive and negative component, I use an 21-point scale (-10, -9, -8, … -1, 0, +1, … +8, +9, +10) to score their significance. For example a Relationship Type might be low in trust (-7), high in common interest (+8), and neutral in equality (0). While all relationships reflect a continuum of these factors I have defined seven benchmark relationship types and have scored each factor on the 21-point scale.

In part two of this article I will define the seven relationship types and their scoring. I also will discuss how the relationship type might impact membership retention in a Rotary club.

Most non-Rotarians have little background information on Rotary and when we try to explain what Rotary is about we usually discuss the aspects of Rotary for which we are most familiar. Often a Club will become involved in eight to ten programs or projects each year and Club members know and understand those programs but may be unaware of how many programs Rotary offers at a District level.

Each District has a menu of support services and program opportunities for its Clubs. The goal is to assist and improve Club operations as well as help develop effective local, regional, and international programs and projects. Each of the over 500 Rotary Districts are supported by a staff of Rotarian volunteers to assist in the formation and maintenance of each project or program.

The unique aspect of Rotary is that a single member typically initiates her or his Club’s participation in a new project or program, so a new member can often take the lead in expanding the service opportunities in her or his Club, while also becoming connected to the Club through involvement. When talking to a potential member, every Rotarian should remember that a non-Rotarian might be the person to ignite a new fire in the Club.

The scope of Rotary
In any given year our Rotary District (5190) there are typically almost 150 District positions staffed by volunteer Rotarians representing many clubs. Among the positions are:

A District 5190 Leadership Meeting

15 Current or Future District Governors and Assistant District Governors assisting the Clubs

80 (approximately) additional Club and District support positions and/or committee members

Each of the functions listed above may have multiple sub-functions, projects, and/or programs. The scope of Rotary is larger than most Rotarians realize, but non-Rotarians also have little, if any, understanding of the dynamic projects and programs that operate under the banner that is Rotary. Our 105 year-old organization has developed highly effective programs that are led by passionate volunteers who invest their time, money, and energy at the Club and District level. The Club and its members are the center of the Rotary universe, but our universe extends far beyond the Club. Rotarians and non-Rotarians should understand the full extend of our organization’s capabilities of service to the Club and to Humankind.

In 2008, Rotary International did a focus group study to discover the perception of non-Rotarians about our organization. It was an eye opener. In order to avoid a conditioned or biased response to the questions the participants of the study were unaware of who funded the study . While no cities in the United States of America were included in the focus group study, it is the best information we have to date about the Public Image (what other people think) of Rotary. At the risk of airing dirty laundry, here’s what we learned:

Study Finding:
People are very cautious about ‘volunteering’

“In most cases individuals are inclined to volunteer, however they are very intent on maintaining enough ‘personal’ time, and they do not consider humanitarian efforts or volunteering as something for which they would give up their ‘personal’ time.”

What may look like fun to some may be scary to others

This is important to note because most Rotarians often remark that ‘giving back’ and ‘service’ is one of the reasons they belong to Rotary, and we tend to readily share with prospective members that volunteering is one of the positive aspects of joining a club. However, this seems to be something we LEARN AFTER we become Rotarians. By approaching potential members with an emphasis on volunteering, we may be dissuading, not persuading them.

We have to remember that all Rotarians usually pick the volunteer activities in which they participate based on their passion for the need. While ‘Service Above Self’ is our motto, the magic of Rotary is that most clubs offer a wide variety of projects and programs, which allow the individual member to choose how and where to invest their time, money, and/or energy. This makes volunteerism a rewarding experience, rather than an obligation. My experience is that every successful new project or program has had a single member who was passionate about the need and was able to excite the other members to join in. The great feeling we have about volunteering is something we learn by experiencing.

Study Finding:

Mistrust of Large Organizations

“An issue that came up in all three regions was the mistrust or skepticism towards large organizational structures …. Respondents also noted that there is a tendency to view smaller organizations as more effective in getting things accomplished at the local level.”

This finding is what caused me to start using the phrase, “All Public Relations is local.” A big billboard about Rotary International will not be as effective as a one license plate holder driving around town on the back of a member’s car. The face of Rotary is and always been the face of our members and those who benefit from our projects and programs at the local level. This is not to minimize the value of our regional and international involvement, but when talking to someone who might be interested in Rotary, they want to know about the club, not the mega-organization.

Study Finding:

Rotary’s Public Image

How Rotary is perceived:“business men, elite, secretive, older, wealthy, largely based on formal rules, inflexible, not sure that women are allowed into local clubs, associated with Free Masons, not ‘trendy’, not ‘sexy’.”

Every time I have presented these findings to Rotarians I have had some uncomfortable laughter, some squirming in the seats, and/or a small gasp. Deep down we know that these perceptions are valid. While we often become blind to the Public Image of our club, by visiting another Rotary club that is more than ten years old we often see how someone could have the perceptions listed above.

I have observed members in some clubs behaving in ways that would not normally be acceptable in a public environment. Professionalism sometimes gives way to fraternity-type behavior with rude jokes, harsh ribbing, and political references that are inappropriate in a business setting. Last year I listened to a speech by a prominent Past District Governor who began by making an offensive political-laced joke about our nation’s President and his wife. All of these behaviors are contrary to Rotary’s mission and our organization’s Constitution.

The challenge is to: 1) accept that we have a Public Image problem, 2) identify the behaviors and actions by clubs and their members that reinforce a negative Public Image, 3) educate the members, 4) perform a Public Image makeover. This process may begin with the Board of Directors, but progress will only be achieved with the acceptance and cooperation of every member regardless of position.

We have one uniting goal in the next 24 months, and that is to make Rotary ‘sexy’ again. Rotary was ‘sexy’ when Paul Harris and three other people created our organization 105 years ago. Within five years cities around the nation were falling all over themselves to start a Rotary club in their community. The unique combination of an emphasis on ethical business practices, friendship, and reaching out to others was the fire that made Rotary’s lamp so bright. It’s time we fueled that fire again.

Recently I listened to a presentation on how to network to increase referrals of potential customers. The speaker made her living by teaching people how to do this, so there is no doubt she knew her subject. Personally, I agree that face-to-face networking skills are critical if you are going to be in business, especially if you have direct customer contact.

However, she quoted statistics from a 2002 study done by the Chamber of Commerce on referral effectiveness based on the method of contact. 2002. That is where she lost me.

How far back is 2002? In 2002, the Department of Justice announced it was going to investigate Enron, the UN Security Council froze the assets of Osama bin Laden, Al-Qaeda, and the Taliban, the Winter Olympics were held in Salt Lake City, Utah, The US Secretary of Energy declared Yucca Mountain, Nevada to be a suitable nuclear waste depository, the Space Shuttle Columbia completed a mission to update the Hubble Space Telescope…it’s last before it would be destroyed on re-entry from it’s next mission in 2003, the United States led coalition invaded Afghanistan, A Beautiful Mind won Best Picture, United Airlines and WorldCom filed for bankruptcy, Congress approved a resolution to go to war with Iraq, and President George W. Bush created the Department ofHomeland Security.

Columbia Space Shuttle Breakup in 2003

To some, it may seem like 2002 was yesterday, but when discussing a topic on how business referrals are made in 2010, quoting data from a single, eight year-old study makes me question the relevancy of any of the information provided. Note that the Internet was only eleven years old in 2002. The first Social Media site,Friendsterwas started in 2002. It wasn’t until 2003, that the more known sites of LinkedIn(May) and MySpace (August) were introduced. Facebook didn’t come on-line until February 2004, YouTube began a year later, and Twitter didn’t start until July 15, 2006.

The world of communication and business have changed dramatically in the past 36 months, let alone the changes over the past eight years. To discuss ‘networking’ from a perspective of the world in 2002 is to be inDenial*of the world of 2010. While ‘more experienced’ business people scoff at “these young people” and their Social Media, the reality is that referrals are being replaced by customer recommendations read off of blogs and other Internet sources. ‘Experienced’ business people can be angry, condescending, and ignorant all they want about the impact of Social Media on business…but it won’t change what has happened. Many people blame government regulation for business failures, but more businesses fail because of outdated business minds and practices than anything other cause and we are neck-deep in 2002 business thinking.

Face-to-face networking is important, but compare the number of face-to-face interactions/connections that a person can make in a day with the number of interactions/connections that can be made through blogs, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter in an hour, and it becomes apparent that dismissing the power of Social Media makes a business person appear uninformed and outdated…sort of like a man who wears shorts, sandals…and black socks. That analogy may not make sense to some people, but then again, those people probably aren’t reading this blog…or any others.

On October 16th, our Rotary District (5190) will hold the second annual Public Relations (PR) seminar. It is a difficult topic because PR is a vital component to all aspects of Club operations, especially Membership recruitment and retention; however, for very ‘human’ reasons many members/clubs may not ready to listen to many of the key concepts because they are not ready to face the reality of the current situation.

To understand the resistance to the topic I need to refer to the 1969 book by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, On Death and Dyingand her model of the grieving process. Her book became a major work in the fields of psychology and counseling for decades and while many experts now reject the idea of ‘stages’ of grieving, her model serves to remind us that people are influenced by their emotional state and some information will not be easily accepted when change intersects with tradition.

On Death and Dying by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross

In the book, Kübler-Ross proposes that the grieving process involves five stages that help us recover from personal crisis back to a more balanced life where the incident or loss does not rule our lives and influence our decision-making. The stages are: 1) Denial, 2) Anger, 3) Bargaining, 4) Depression, and finally, 5) Acceptance.

So what is happening in Rotary that would cause a member or a club to be in crisis? Two issues come to mind.

Membership in Crisis First, Rotary has been battling a significant membership issue for almost 15 years. For example, in 2005, Rotary Zone 23 (now re-zoned as Zone 25) had 568 clubs consisting of 33,921 members and five years later (2009) Zone 23 consisted of 33,304 members in 588 clubs. While the number of clubs had increased by 20, total membership had decreased by over 600 people. This is only about a two percent loss over five years; however, the problem is that, 1) this has been a consistent trend for most of the last 15 years, and 2) every Rotary International President for the last nine years has pushed for increased membership as part of the key programs for his year.

The facts are simple: Rotary is bleeding membership and clubs are getting smaller (in Zone 23, an average of 3 members smaller over five years.) In seven years Rotary has brought in 1.2 million members…and lost 1.2 million members. Membership in North America, and many other western countries is on the decline. If current trends continue, over the next 15 to 20 years many community Rotary clubs will shrink until they are no longer relevant and then disband. Many small clubs are already facing this problem today and have less than five years to solve their membership crisis.

A New Business World
The second issue is external to the Rotary club. Business and communication is undergoing a rapid change and all the rules are changing. The Internet and, in particular, Social Media have challenged how business operates in a world where one person can be heard by millions, and if that person is talking about your product or service you have to be plugged in and listening or be lost in ignorance of what your customers and potential customers know about you. This new world demands personal involvement, yet many people (especially older business people) don’t want to be forced to participate in Social Media tools that put them and their company up for public scrutiny. There is a growing division between older professionals that tend to reject Social Media tools and younger professionals that tend to accept them. Guess in which category most Rotarians fit?

Action Obstructed by GrievingPublic Relations offers potential solutions to both issues. By becoming aware of the Club’s public image (how non-members perceive Rotary) the members can adapt their PR plan to maximize the value of the club projects and programs to help non-members understand the purpose and scope of Rotary. Members can also be aware of behaviors and information that reinforce negative stereotypes that non-members may have about Rotary, then avoid situations that might damage the reputation of the club. PR can also help members understand and adapt to the Social Media tools and use them to the best advantage for the club…and their business.

The problem is that discussion of these solutions is premature when someone is grieving. It is akin to telling the man who just lost his wife that, “there are plenty of fish in the ocean.” The combination of scrambling to understand a new business environment while facing a slow bleed of Rotary club members has many Rotarians in the one of the stages of grieving.

For some it is the first stage: Denial:

Stages of Coping with Loss

“There is no membership crisis. The world is the same today as it always has been. Our club is fine, we’ve been around for decades and we will continue to be here for decades to come.”

For others it is Anger:

“This is our club! We don’t need to change, if someone wants to belong to our club they need to change to our way of doing things! Don’t tell me what to do, I’ve been around a lot longer than you! Most of our members aren’t even on Facebook!”

For some it is Bargaining:

“We need QUALITY members, not more members. What help are we going to get to make these changes? How do you know this will work? How do I know this is not just a waste of time?”

And for some it is Depression:

“….”

Of all of the stages, a club should fear depression the most. Apathy and membership are never good combinations; however, for some members who are overwhelmed by change, the depression over the issues will open the door for them to quietly leave Rotary. In some cases, a member who is entrenched in tradition may not be able to accept change and leaving Rotary is the only option, but hopefully we can be aware that grieving change is part of the process and present the message in a way that will help members to the final stage of grieving, Acceptance.

It’s like Agent Smith said to Mr. Anderson (Neo) in The Matrix as he held him as the subway train rushed toward them:

Do you hear that Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability. It is the sound of your own death.

That is what my lawn says to me everyday as it smirks and says, “Do you hear that Mr. Kiser? That is the sound of inevitability. It is the sound of nature winning.” It doesn’t stop with the grass. Everyday we face the battle against the march of time. We live in a reality that will always have the last word…and last laugh. We cannot win….

Agent Smith: The sound of inevitability

…but I don’t see it that way.

I mow my lawn and I do it as an act of defiance. Yes, it is going to grow back, and yes, I could spend my time some other way than weekly harvesting my valueless grass, but that would be giving up.

We can have small victories. We can defy the odds and make nature work for her ‘inevitability’. Yes, the grass will grow, but look at my lawn and today… it didn’t win. The day belongs to me and my lawnmower. Take your inevitability and chew on it, Mother Nature, because today I own you.

In the past few years I have noticed that many people have given in to Agent Smith. They see only the inevitability. Everything will only lead to failure, so why try? The only problem is that everything great that humans have accomplished have been done by defying inevitability. bridges, tunnels, interstate highways, monuments, dams, water systems, sewer systems, powerlines,….the list goes on. It is in our nature to defy nature…and win….even if it is only for today.

Whether it is the start of a new school year, greeting the 833rd customer of the day, inviting the 18th prospective new member when the first 17 didn’t join, planning the fundraiser…again, walking around and talking to the employees for the third time today, or convincing someone that a new creative idea really can work, we beat the odds and make inevitability wait and that’s why we exist.

Beating inevitability

So I will continue to mow my lawn…until Alexander is old enough to do it.

Social Media (sO-shul mE-dE-ah) – 1) any Internet function that allows user comment or input, 2) interconnected Internet tools that promote participation in the sharing of ideas, concepts, and information between users or members, 3) a type of interactive communication on the Internet that bypasses the non-interactive, one-way, broadcast-type communication of traditional media (e.g.; newspaper, magazine, radio, television, books, etc.) 4) an evil plot devised by mostly young people who seek to destroy traditional media, end all privacy, and rule the world by talking to each other.

Paul Kiser

Rotary is not an organization that reacts quickly to change. The parent organization meets only once every three years to discuss and propose major policy changes and even then the meeting consists of senior representatives (Past District Governors) from each Rotary District. Rotary clubs themselves often consist of members that disproportionately represents males over 50, (of which I am one,) and that group is not normally known for its adaptation skills in changing environments. In many ways, Rotary is the poster child for rigidity, rules, and tradition.

The problem is that we don’t live in a world that rewards the slow or unadaptive. We have moved into a period of rapid change that is similar to the Crusades ‘convert or die’ philosophy and nowhere is this more obvious than in the world of Social Media. Never before have we seen a key function of our world, namely communication, advance in such a short time period. We now live in the Peter Drucker and Tom Peters world of Ready, Fire, Aim!

Consider the revolution of computers. From the introduction of personal computers from 1975 to 1985, the personal computer at home and in the office was a novelty. It was an interesting device, but limited in its usefulness. By 1985, the personal computer was starting to become a staple in business and by 1995, the computer was firmly entrenched into our everyday lives. It took approximately 20 years for computers to go from ‘a toy’ to staple of life.

Compare the computer revolution to the Social Media revolution. Just over six years ago Facebook didn’t exist. Just over four years ago Twitter didn’t exist. In the past three years the way we communicate has so drastically changed that email is considered on par with snail mail by most people under 30 years old.

So what does this mean for a world-wide service organization like Rotary? Change. Change like our organization has never experienced in its 105 years. But it will be good change…for most of us.

Open Discussion of Issues The Social Media revolution is characterized by open discussion of ideas and concepts. Over the next 18 months we should expect to see more members who are passionate about Rotary writing personal blogs. These individual blogs will not be sanitized messages approved by Rotary International, but personal viewpoints (like this one) discussing current issues at the Club, District, and RI levels. Sometimes the ideas and opinions expressed will be uplifting, sometimes awkward and/or uncomfortable, and sometimes they will just be wrong. The point is that there will be discussion of Rotary…good…bad…or both, and we should expect it.

The leadership of Rotary, from Club Presidents to the RI President, can either pretend it is not happening and hope it will go away, or they can decide to participate. My vote is participation. A District Governor may serve her or his District for a year and speak once at every club, but a blog is forever and is accessible to everyone in the world. Wise input from knowledgeable leaders can help promote positive discussions, and discourage inappropriate discussions. The worst thing to do is to allow a single Rotarian to create misguided impressions of Rotary by not correcting or responding to incorrect statements.

This must be done with care, as we are all aware that in the 1980’s Rotary International (RI) took a stand against a California club that allowed women to join, thus beginning a fight that ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court where RI ended up on the wrong end of the law.

Still, we do have key principles that must be protected as was the case in 2006-07. A California club began promoting a project to buy special ammo clips for U.S. soldiers at war in Iraq and Afghanistan and was pedaling this program to other clubs. Clearly, this was a violation of Rotary’s peaceful mission to serve and of RI’s Constitution. Such violations of our principles must be addressed and corrected by the leadership of Rotary.

Rotary leadership must take care in participating, but they should not only comment, they should write their own blogs. A more open discussion of Rotary related issues will serve to make our organization stronger and will help guide the leadership to address true member issues, not just what filters up through the Chain of Command.

Better Communications – Smaller Chunks, Targeted Audience In the 1960’s a newsletter was vital information that couldn’t be accessed anywhere else. As copy machines in the 1970’s and 80’s got better the quality of the newsletters got better. The spread of color inkjet printers (HP made a killing on color ink) of the 1990’s brought newsletters to the height of their glory and anybody and everybody put out newsletters about anything. Today, a newsletter is only slightly higher on the value scale than junk mail. The problem is that few people have time to spend 15 minutes reading it and much of the information is not of interest to the reader. In addition, the quality of the editing and design of a weekly club newsletter goes from professional grade to…well, not so much. Often the editor is a volunteer who is passionate about the club, but may or may not agree with the current priorities of the club leadership.

Enter Facebook and Twitter. Most clubs I’ve been involved in regarding incorporating Facebook or Twitter into club communications have included this statement, “But most of our club members don’t use Facebook.” If there is a defining remark about the state of a club’s recruitment situation, that is it. Over 500 million people use Facebook and Rotary clubs don’t think it is relevant because their current members don’t use it. If your membership is not using the most current methods of communication, that should tell you why people in the real world see Rotary and your club as out-of-date and out of touch.

Facebook and Twitter provide information in small readable chunks. No one has to read all 10,000 words in the newsletter to get the information they need, they just read what is of interest to them and they read it in a format that gives it to them when they are ready to read it. Those that don’t use Facebook or Twitter will find that they know less and less about what is going on in the world around them and ignorance is not a Rotary value. The club that doesn’t have an active website and Facebook Fan Page within 12 months will most likely be the club that is consistently struggling to maintain membership. It that simple.

Fortunately, I know that Rotary clubs will adapt to the new Social Media whether anyone wants it or not. They will adapt because those clubs that don’t will waste away, while those that embrace Social Media will begin to see new, younger, smarter members fill in the ranks. It’s the way change works according to Darwin.

Paul Harris began Rotary to make connections with other people. Paul Harris would have loved Social Media.

I have a challenge for every North American Rotary club that is at least ten years old:

Step 1.Look up all the new members that were inducted in the last three and a half years, excluding the new members inducted in the last six months (e.g; members inducted between January 2007 and January 2010.) Step 2.Determine how many of those members left the club. Step 3. Contact them (if living) and ask the following questions:

Why did you leave the club?

Why did you really leave the club?

In a time when more connections with business people would be more critical, why didn’t our club offer this to you?

What type of person would you recommend to join our club? (Age, gender, personality, etc.)

What irritated/disappointed you about our club?

Step 4. Hold a Board Meeting to discuss the results.

Rule One is that no one is allowed to diminish or discount the statements of the former member (e.g.; “She never was really happy with us.” or “They just wanted to network.” or “He joined for the wrong reasons.”)

Rule Two is that no one on the Board who has served over three years is allowed to participate in the discussion for the first 30 minutes.

I think you’ll find the results interesting and tell you the public image that your club projects to others. Why? Too many Rotarians are looking for members who think, believe, talk, act, and look like the existing club members. New members who don’t fit the mold are the first to leave. The question is whether the club is ready to adjust their behavior to be more inclusive of business professionals who may not fit the mold.

The reason to limit the participation of long-term Board members is because members who have become entrenched in the decision-making process of the club tend to have too much say and tend to try to preserve the status quo.

On July 1 of every year Rotary rolls out a new administration. From the club level to the 18th floor of One Rotary Center the leadership for our organization makes quietly dramatic team substitution. Each year starts with the hope of pushing Rotary to new levels of success and each year ends with a long sigh of relief.

When I first joined Rotary on July 5, 2001, I learned quickly that a new adminstration was not to take any action, including planning, until July 1, which meant that it was late August before the club leadership could get organized. This concept of not ‘stepping on the current President’s toes’ was an outdated, destructive dogma that held back the club from being prepared and in motion when the first bell rang in July. Somewhere around our Centennial in 2005 I noticed that the attitude was changing and clubs were being encouraged to get the new leadership trained and ready before July 1 and each subsequent year the quality and preparedness of clubs has improved. At least in our District, the class of 2010-11 is perhaps the best prepared for putting words and ideas into action when they stand up in front of the club on Week 1.

Theme for 2010-11

But preparing and training only set the stage, it is performance that counts. The world has changed and the role of a service organization that is not bound by religious, political, or ideological motives is more critical than ever in a world where those motives are driving a wedge between people instead of uniting them. Rotary’s constitution and history have freed our members from judging our fellow world citizens before we offer to serve, nor do we serve them with the intention of converting them to our beliefs. Rotary’s motto of Service Above Self means that we are in the unique position of unrequited care and service to others. In 2010 and beyond, the world is in desperate need of that which is the core of a Rotarian’s heart.

But we are faced with a challenge that has been dogging us for years. Despite multiple years of great Rotary International (RI) Presidents, and District Governors, one year looks much like the previous year any many of our key club functions. Our new themes and leadership fail to make any significant headway with the-way-we-have-always-done-things paradigm.

One area that demonstrates this is in Membership. An organization that is stagnant in membership growth cannot expect to meet new challenges and yet for seven years we have sat at 1.2 million members. In our District (5190) the average size of a club has been steadily shrinking. Last year I researched the last five years and found that we have dropped from an average of 53 members per club (June 2005) down to 47 members (September 2009.) As of April of 2010, that average has dropped to 46 members per club. This is not a criticism of our District because I suspect I would find the same data in all the North American Districts. It is apparent that not only is our growth stagnant, but our clubs are shrinking, which means fewer members to take on a bigger role.

2010-11 RI President Ray Klinginsmith

The question for each of us is whether this will be another year of Retread Membership or a year of rebirth, (Renaissance,) in Membership? To have a rebirth we must have a new approach and not be locked into medieval thinking. Current RI President John Kenny gave us the theme, The Future of Rotary is in Your Hands, and upcoming RI President Ray Klinginsmith challenges clubs to ‘get bigger, better, bolder’. Both invite Rotarians to not make a Retread of the 2010-11 year, but to spawn a Renaissance of our organization. So what holds us back?

I have had many conversations with Rotarians about membership. I often hear about the barriers and challenges. But what I know is that the difference between a Retread Rotary year and a Rotary Renaissance will be determined not by a theme, or by the words of the RI President, or by great work by a District Governor. Creating a Rotary Renaissance will be determined by individual club members who decide that there are no excuses and that failure in membership growth is not an option. Robert Kennedy is credited with saying, “If not us, who? If not now, when?” Two questions every Rotarian should ask themselves in this new Rotary year.

When Rotary was formed in 1905, Paul Harris was 36. The other three original members were 34, 40, 42. I note there ages because it is important to remember that our organization was started by young professionals, not ‘seasoned’ executives. It was a true business networking club, not a just a social club. The original concept of Rotary was to create business opportunities with other ethical business people. If it were meant to be a just another social club they wouldn’t have required the Club Statistician to track business transactions between club members. A practice that was continued until 1911.

Nor was the concept of community service in the original club’s concept. It would be 1906 before a new member would join with the intent of adding community service to the function of Rotary. While the spirit of voluntarism is a critical part of every modern club, that wasn’t why Rotary was founded.

Rotary was truly a young professionals networking club at its inception; however, today’s Rotary club is a foreign environment to most business people under 45. In discussions with several young professionals I have gained insight on why Rotary tends to repel those that it should attract. Interestingly, in discussions with Rotarians I have found we often have no clue as to how young professionals perceive Rotary, and in fact, I have found that some Rotarians have a bias against youth.

It’s Their Fault I have heard several Rotarians comment that even when they induct a young professional, the new members often don’t stay with the club. This attrition is usually blamed on the former member’s attitude or other personal failings. Many clubs will not accept that they have any responsibility for what they could have done better to retain him or her. In one case a very prominent local Rotarian was advising clubs to ignore anyone under 40 as a potential member. His reasoning was that, “They have kids and they’re not in a place in their career to be a good Rotarian.” That was a great attitude…for keeping Rotary an old person’s organization.

Lack of Respect and Bad Public Image Some Rotarians may think that they have no bias toward young professionals, but actions speak louder than words. I have even found myself sitting at a table with a young professional and I instantly associate them with my adult children and began talking about my twenty-something daughters, rather than discussing business topics. It is a bias and it is disrespectful to equate a young professional with our adult children. It also creates a public image that we are an old person’s social club, not a business professionals club for all ages.

I have also sat in Rotary clubs where the youngest members are joked about solely because they are young. It makes for entertainment for the older members and may seem like it’s all in good fun, but emphasizing the age difference just makes us look older and any young professional attending for the first time may have a clear impression that this is not an environment of mutual respect for them. Some members further cement a club’s public image by telling political, religious, or gender jokes that would not be acceptable in any public environment, but are tolerated in the Rotary club.

Reno New Generations Rotary Club Pre-Charter BBQ

The Solution – Segregation? In Reno, Nevada, USA there is a new type of Rotary club that consists mostly of young professionals under 45 years old. It was modeled of the Rotary Club of La Jolla New Generations. It is not a Rotaract club, but a full-fledged Rotary club that meets in the early evening. Drinks are available and meals can be ordered, but most members do not eat. I have attended this club several times and most of what I have learned about the way we treat young professionals has been through my discussions with the members of this club. They are all stellar Rotarians who, in six months, have dived in to many community service projects. They are also business professionals, some in significant positions in their organizations. What they don’t experience in the club is treatment as adult children, or made to feel that they are too young to be serious business people.

Rotary has stood at 1.2 million members for seven years. If we are to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow we need to have a growing organization, not a stagnant one. The question is whether existing Rotary clubs are willing to tap into the millions of young professionals who seek to network with other business people. To do this clubs must address any potential age bias and become more aware of member behavior and how it might negatively impact a club’s public image. The alternative is to segregate young professionals in their own clubs and let the existing clubs eventually die out through attrition. It seems obvious that the former is the best solution, but it first will require existing members to accept individual responsibility for creating the club’s public image and that they must promote a positive impression that does not offend the best source of new members, the under-45 business professional.

We all have a responsibility to ensure the future of Rotary as a strong, viable, and relevant organization and to do that we only need to remember what we owe to Paul Harris and the other three young professionals that founded our organization…a duty to keep our clubs a place of honor and respect for all professionals..old and young.

The plan was simple. On a business trip to Illinois I would go to the Rotary International (RI) headquarters in Evanston and take a few pictures to put in a future blog. Simple. No big deal. At our District Conference in May I mentioned to District Governor Elect Steve Lewis that I was going to stop by RI HQ and take some pictures. “Call them first,” DGE Steve said, “they’ll give you a tour.” Okay. That might be nice. So I called the main RI number and set up an appointment. A quick look at RI could be interesting.

One Rotary Center

A little before 10 AM on a beautiful June day I walked into the main cog of the Rotary universe: One Rotary Center. I’m instructed to go up to the 16th floor where I was greeted by Delores and another staff member at the front reception area. I told them my name and my purpose and Delores repeated, “Oh, you’re here for the TOUR!” I expected the emphasis to be on the ‘Oooh’, as if to say, ‘here’s another Rotarian here for the dog and pony tour’. But Delores sounded excited, like it was great to have a Rotarian look over the home of 1.2 million members. She called my tour guide, Amanda Runge, who promptly greeted me in the waiting area.

Amanda and her friend Paul

I learned that Amanda is not just a tour guide. She is a Program Coordinator for the 41 new Rotary Coordinators (RCs) that will serve to assist Clubs as a resource for multiple areas such as Youth Programs. RI President Elect Ray Klinginsmith created the RC post in an effort to help clubs reach a level of excellence through close-in support by knowledgeable Rotarians who have proven skills and expertise in a wide range of Rotary programs. (For more information go to this link:)

As Program Coordinator, Amanda will be the hands-on RI support out of Evanston, so I was actually interfering in her day, but you would have never known it by the attention she gave to me for almost an hour. My simple, no big deal of a tour was rapidly becoming kind of a big deal. As it turns out Amanda is a product of Rotary. Her Mother is a Rotarian and she was a participant in a five-week Rotary Exchange program to France. I knew the outgoing, friendly demeanor seemed familiar…it’s the same we see with almost every Youth Exchange student after they return to her or his host country.

Replica of the 711 office where the original Chicago club met

The Tour After seeing ‘Room 711’, the office where most of the Rotary meetings were held for the first several months of Rotary and a look at a room of memorabilia from the office of Paul Harris, Amanda took me up to the top floor of One Rotary Center. As in most office buildings, the ‘big cog’s’ offices are around the exterior of the top floor. The difference at Rotary is that there is a type of musical chairs (or offices) in this space. Each new year the President-Elect, the President Nominee, and the President Nominee Designate change offices. The Immediate Past RI President thanked for his service as he is also moved out of his corner office. Ouch!

Eileen Eckhouse and Amanda Runge

It was on the 18th floor that we saw the RI PE Ray in his office talking on the phone. I asked Amanda if I could take a picture of him on the phone. His Executive Assistant Eileen Eckhouse and RI PE Ray’s Number One (his full-time Rotarian Aide) Duane Sterling were both just outside his office and Amanda consulted them. Duane said,”But don’t you want a picture with him? He’ll be off the phone in a minute.”

Before I know it RI PE Ray is standing beside me introducing himself…like that was necessary…and he suggests we go over in front of the Flags of Nations in the elevator lobby for the picture. There another gentleman joined us to talk to Ray (I’m pretending were on a first name basis) and Amanda introduced me to him. It was the General Secretary of Rotary International, Ed Futa.

In Rotary a President serves for one year, the General Secretary can serve for decades. The first General Secretary, Chez Perry, served for 32 years and I refer to him as the ‘Mother’ of Rotary as he did the work that helped establish and grow our organization. My instant impression of General Secretary Ed was that he performs his duties with the same passion as Chez Perry.

I am now standing next to two of the three men that occupy the corner offices on the top floor of RI and Amanda says, “Why don’t you have your picture with both of them?” At this point reality sort of fades away. It was not supposed to be a big deal, but by the time I walked out of the building it started to hit me what had occurred. It was a big deal…and I have the picture!

After the photo op, the three of us sat down and…wait-a-minute, that’s my fantasy world. What actually happened was the gentlemen went on to do real work and Amanda continued the tour of the top floor and the next floor down, which is the Rotary Foundation. Finally, the tour ended and I bought a few things at the Rotary store and then left.

It was sheer luck of timing that I found myself standing between the two people who have a great responsibility as leaders of our organization, but I will always remember the day I stood on the top floor of Rotary International flanked by RI’s President Elect and General Secretary.

One Rotary Center does not have the significance of a religious ‘Mecca’, but that doesn’t diminish it’s importance to all of us. It’s well worth the visit and I would recommend it for anyone visiting the Chicago area. After all, it’s the home…for 1.2 million of us.

You’ve been warned about ‘this person’ and now you’re being introduced to them. You smile and shake his hand and say, “nice to meet you.” Visibly, you are polite and friendly; however, inside your hoping to be able to move on because even though you’ve never met him before you are preconditioned to not like him. The introduction ends and you move on believing that went things went smoothly. He walks away knowing that you dislike him and he begins to form a negative impression of you. In less than five seconds you have cemented a negative relationship…and you didn’t even know it. What happened?

Malcolm Gladwell

In Malcolm Gladwell’s book,Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, it is called it thin-slicing and it is based on solid research. Gladwell uses many examples of how the human brain picks up seemingly unseen and unheard clues and can accurately identify what is going on in a given situation. In one example, researcher John Gottman and his team coded conversations between married couples using 14 emotional identifiers (1=contempt, 2=anger, etc.) and found that they could accurately predict whether or not the couple was heading for a divorce by the subtle clues that betrayed the inner thoughts and attitudes of each person. Most of these signals lasted a second or less, but the signal clearly indicated the inner feelings of the person and the pattern of their relationship.

Gladwell argues that in a thin-slice experience we usually do not know what we know, nor why we know it, but the evidence is conclusive, we do know it. It is often described as a ‘feeling’ and people usually cannot explain it to others, so it is usually dismissed as being oversensitive. Gladwell‘s research suggests that the feeling is real and that our unconscious mind is the source of the analysis that creates a tangible, and accurate feeling and/or assessment of the situation.

Conversations Are Never Just Casual

Based on the information in Blink one can conclude that when someone has a dislike for someone, or when people discuss someone else behind their back, the attitudes felt or expressed privately will be exposed in subtle hints the next time we meet the subject of the gossip. We are taught as children to not gossip about others, which was a valuable lesson based on what we now know; however, in the business world people often discuss work performance of subordinates with their peers or superiors. Those discussions then shape our attitudes about the subordinate, which are then revealed in our next interaction with the worker. The same can be said of any relationship, whether it be a superior/subordinate, peer/peer, Club member/member, parent/child, spouse/spouse, or any interaction between two people. Simply put, strong attitudes and opinions about another person can and will be read by that person at the next meeting.

But what is worse is once a negative relationship is formed it is almost impossible to revert it to a positive relationship. Gladwell says that if a person has contempt or other negative attitudes towards someone, even a kind or reconciliatory gesture will be misread as manipulation or motivated by a hidden agenda. That idea is reinforced by the theory of cognitive dissonance, which suggests that once we have an opinion or belief about something we will reject evidence that contradicts our opinion or belief and will even go so far as to manufacture evidence or examples to support our version of the truth.

Do We Have to Like Everyone? Certainly we don’t have to have a positive relationship with everyone, but negative relationships tend to expend more of our energy and time. This is especially true for people in positions of leadership. Consider the time spent on emails, meetings, phone calls, and emotional stress that involve interactions with people who we have an adversarial relationship versus the support and positive reinforcement we receive through friendly relationships. It is obvious that a negative relationship that is based on our preconditioning to dislike them is not only counterproductive, but also an unnecessary waste of time and emotion.

The first step in avoiding the downward spiral of negative relationships is to recognize that our internal dislike for someone is not hidden from that person. Our actions, behaviors, and responses will be picked up and will, in turn, dictate their response to us. Gossip, whether it is causally done with friends, or professionally sanctioned as part of ‘assessment’ of subordinates is dangerous to our relationship with that person and will ultimately make our life more difficult. Most of us were taught at some point to never say anything about anyone unless you are prepared to say it to their face….it is a good rule in the home, at work, or anywhere else.

Rotary's Four-Way Test

Rotary has a Four-Way Test that is a guide to any relationship. It is meant to take Rotarians to a higher standard in business and in life. The ‘test’ is as follows:

First, is it the Truth?

Second, is it fair to all concerned?

Third, will it build goodwill and better friendships?

Fourth, will it be beneficial to all concerned?

Great words that can help us to build great relationships…even when sliced thin.

BP…formerly known as British Petroleum, has a disaster on their hands and it is not just the disaster caused by millions of gallons of crude oil spewing out in the Gulf of Mexico. They have a public relations disaster that is re-establishing the oil industry’s reputation as the sleaziest in a business world that is not known for its ethical choices. Among their biggest mistakes has been to minimize the estimates of how much oil is leaking into open water. It is obvious that at best BP executives are completely incompetent or at worst they have intentionally deceived the public. In either case, they confirm in the public’s mind that business is all about greed and that business ethics is an oxymoron.

Greed is Good

Unfortunately, business often fails to be good custodians of our society because for profit enterprise is inherently based on a motive of greed. In the 1987 film, Wall Street, Gordon Gekko (performed by Michael Douglas), says, “Greed is good.” Gekko is merely pointing out that while greed is a selfish, dishonorable emotion, it is the fuel that drives business.

The fact that business is riddled with unethical people is not new. When Rotary was born in 1905, Chicago business people were more like Gordon Gekko than like Paul Harris, the founding father of Rotary. Business was riddled with corruption and fraudulent practices.

However, those that joined Rotary created an environment that rewarded honor in business. A Rotarian sought out his fellow Rotarians with which to do business. Each member knew that business transactions became personal when you had to sit down with the customer at the next club meeting. But Rotary didn’t formally commit to a philosophy of ethics until several years after the first club was chartered, and it wasn’t Paul Harris that led the charge.

By 1912, Paul Harris had served as President of the International Association of Rotary Clubs for two years and had spent many long hours during the past seven years nurturing the birth and growth of Rotary into a major organization. As he passed the gavel to Glenn Mead, Mr. Harris stepped away from Rotary for what would be a 10-year hiatus. Had Rotary consisted of followers, the absence of a major figure like Paul Harris would have left the organization in dismay; however Rotary consists of business leaders and President Mead stepped up to the challenge and launched a new emphasis on establishing a Code of Ethics for Rotarians to follow.

It took two years and a long train ride to the 1914 Rotary Convention in Houston, Texas to put together a formal declaration of business ethics for the organization, but both the 1914 and 1915 Rotary Conventions voted to adopt eleven articles of ethical business standards. After almost 100 years, BP as well as every business person could learn several lessons that would help them avoid disasters and Public Relations nightmares by following the 1914 Rotary Code of Ethics:

The 1914 Rotary Code of Ethics For Businessmen of All Lines

My business standards shall have in them a note of sympathy for our common humanity. My business dealings, ambitions and relations shall always cause me to take into consideration my highest duties as a member of society. In every position in business life, in every responsibility that comes before me, my chief thought shall be to fill that responsibility and discharge that duty so when I have ended each of them, I shall have lifted the level of human ideals and achievements a little higher than I found it. As a Rotarian it is my duty:

I

To consider any vocation worthy and as affording me distinct opportunity to serve society.

II

To improve myself, increase my efficiency and enlarge my service, and by doing so attest my faith in the fundamental principle of Rotary, that he/she profits most who serves the best.

III

To realize that I am a business man and ambitious to succeed; but that I am first an ethical man and wish no success that is not founded on the highest justice and morality.

IV

To hold that the exchange of my goods, my service and my ideas for profit is legitimate and ethical, provided that all parties in the exchange are benefited thereby.

V

To use my best endeavors to elevate the standards of the vocation in which I am engaged, and so to conduct my affairs that others in my vocation may find it wise, profitable and conducive to happiness to emulate my example.

VI

To conduct my business in such a manner that I may give a perfect service equal to or even better than my competitor, and when in doubt to give added service beyond the strict measure of debt or obligation.

VII

To understand that one of the greatest assets of a professional or of a business man is his friends and that any advantage gained by reason of friendship is eminently ethical and proper.

VIII

To hold that true friends demand nothing of one another and that any abuse of the confidence of friendship for profit is foreign to the spirit of Rotary, and in violation of its Code of Ethics.

IX

To consider no personal success legitimate or ethical which is secured by taking unfair advantage of certain opportunities in the social order that are absolutely denied others, nor will I take advantage of opportunities to achieve material success that others will not take because of the questionable morality involved.

X

To be not more obligated to a brother Rotarian than I am to every other man in human society; because the genius of Rotary is not in its competition, but in its cooperation; for provincialism can never have a place in an institution like Rotary, and Rotarians assert that Human Rights are not confined to Rotary Clubs, but are as deep and as broad as the race itself; and for these high purposes does Rotary exist to educate all men and all institutions.

XI

Finally, believing in the universality of the Golden Rule, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them, we contend that Society best holds together when equal opportunity is accorded all men in the natural resources of this planet.

Last weekend we took a short vacation in the Bay area (Pacifica/San Francisco, CA, USA.) During the trip I took notice of signs along the way and it struck me that they might say more about us…than to us. Here are some signs of note:

Do you want to be Smart or Stupid?

Obvious Choices This sign on Market street in San Francisco spoke a truth that you can’t argue with…but does it need to be said? In politics and entertainment we definitely see who has balls and they do seem to gather a following, but maybe it’s time we celebrate intelligence. The great outcome of social media is that people are looking deeper than just short, catchy statements that gain a “Right on!” from those who are wowed by a deceptive turn of phrase.

In politics it seems the more outrageous the idea the more excited some people get about a candidate. I’ve watched people become incensed over very sound ideas to solve our most significant problems and those same people then praise politicians that spew out hate for everything that has made our country great. I hope that this is a phase that we outgrow soon…before the ballsy people destroy all that we stand for as Americans.

The pen is mightier than the sword

Write On! I hadn’t seen this Nike ad before. It is in the Union Square area of San Francisco and if Nike is speaking of the explosion of Social Interactive Media then I agree!

Before the Internet and Social Media tools a small group of editors controlled who could have a voice and be published. Now new and raw ideas are being openly expressed in millions of independent blogs. Some of us could use an editor, but the beauty of this New World of communication is that the reader is the editor…it is democracy in its purest form.

A great future is coming…today is still under construction

We’re Not There Yet Some people seem easily frustrated that we never get ‘there’. We are in a world where change is constant and the road is always in a state of being improved. Satisfaction is the most temporary of all human feelings and people who do not understand this fact will always be deceived by bad politicians and religious fanatics who promise a perfect tomorrow if we only do exactly what they tell us.

Buddhists promote the idea of being and I think that is a great attitude to have to survive this world. Take advice from the musical group Black Eyed Peas.To me the title of one of their latest songs says it all: Imma Be. Yes the world is always changing but that is what makes it exciting. Take a break from time to time and then re-engage and have some fun!

Greet the day and be open for new possibilities

Arms Wide Open Yes, I had to get my four year-old in on this blog. In Union Square he thought he could catch a bird. He actually knew that he couldn’t, but that did not dissuade him from trying.

I hope that he can maintain a sense of wonder and never let those that think it can’t be done hold him back from trying. There are people in this world whose sole function is to be a naysayer. These people infest anyplace where past success has built up an organization. They constantly destroy all new ideas and creativity in the name of ‘preserving the traditions.’ Don’t ever believe it! The only way to counter their negative attitude is to ignore them and move on.

Lots of choices, but where do we want to go?

Where to Go? It doesn’t have to be confusing. We only need to remember that life happens. Today is tomorrow’s history and we choose which signs to follow to get there.

Do you love me?….Do you like me?….Do you loath me? What is the quality of our relationship?

There are some people who claim that Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter cheapen relationships. I don’t agree. Social Interactive Media almost always increase the quantity of our relationships, but does that mean the quality of relationships is reduced?

To me that is similar to saying that because a person belongs to a Rotary club it reduces the quality of his or her relationships because they are using up their allotment of friendship in one place or that children in a family of five are not as loved as the only child in a family of three. The logic makes no sense.

A blog that decries the impact of Social Media on our relationships, combined with another blog by Carola Valdez regarding love and relationships have me thinking about the quality of relationships and the impact of tools like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter.

I see this issue as two intertwined subjects, which are relationships and communication. A relationship describes the connection between two people and communication maintains the connection. I divide the concept of relationship into three parts that all work together to determine the bond or quality of a relationship.

Relationships Part One: Core Reactionary Characteristics (CRC) I believe that every person has relationship ‘DNA’ . It is the combination of our inherent personality, our experiences from past relationships, and a third factor that reacts to the stimulus (or ‘chemistry, if you will) between two people. I term this set of responsive behaviors the Core Reactionary Characteristics (or CRC). I use the analogy of DNA because genes are able to attach or connect with certain genes but not to other genes in the DNA strand, which is similar to our ability to ‘click’ or not with someone else.

Social Media makes us aware of how connected we are to each other

Relationships Part Two: Environmental Factors Just because we feel comfortable connecting with someone doesn’t mean we will become close friends. It is a combination of the old nature/nurture influences that seem to guide relationships. We may have a great ‘chemistry’ with someone, but it is our environment that controls the depth of the relationship. I like the example given in the lyrics of Alanis Morissette’s song, ‘Ironic’.

“It’s meeting the man of my dreams, and then meeting his beautiful wife.”

It doesn’t have to be a love relationship that is thwarted by the situational factors, but love is the type of relationship we relate to when someone wants to write a song or make a movie. The point is that if the CRC is compatible AND given the correct time, place, and freedom to explore a relationship, a deep connection (friendship and/or love) can be formed.

Relationships Part Three: Dynamics Finally, I think it is important to accept that relationships are dynamic, which simply means that as individuals grow and change the relationship waxes and wanes. I have a friend who had an incredibly close relationship with his wife (she passed away a couple of years ago.) On their anniversary he would say, “We’ve decided to renew our marriage for another year.” This was not meant to be as funny as most people seemed to interpret it. He truly did value the relationship and didn’t take it for granted that the marriage would be continuous. I wonder how strong all marriages would be if we knew that either party could decide not to renew the contract each year.

My point is that regardless of how strong a relationship, the fact is that two people can grow and change at different rates over time. It is rare that a relationship can maintain a high level of intensity especially if the two people are in the process of change and/or growth.

It is the combination of all three factors (CRC, Environmental Factors, and Dynamics) that determine the quality of a relationship at any given moment.

Social Media and Relationships
Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter increase the number of people we know (quantity of relationships) but the quality of those relationships are dependent on multiple factors that have nothing to do with the tools or the media itself. In the end, the quality of the relationships are not affected positively or negatively by the quantity of relationships we have, but by the type of connection that will result of making a connection. If anything, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter make it possible to have better quality relationships because they; 1) increase the number of potential ‘best friends’, and 2) give us better communication tools to improve the quality of our connections.

Last week the Washington Post Company declared that it could no longer handle the losses of the 77 year-old Newsweek magazine and announced that it was seeking a buyer. This comes as no shock to those who are closely involved in the industry. Print media in general is under siege by competition from the Internet and there is no bottom in sight. The impact of the Age of Omni Communication is being felt by all the traditional media, including guaranteed circulation magazines like Rotary International’s The Rotarian magazine.

Traditional Media Too Comfortable For most of the 20th century the traditional media sources of newspapers, magazines, radio and television had settled into their respective niches. It was a balance that allowed all of the traditional media to control their share of the advertising revenue.

Print media has been accustomed to measuring success based on circulation, which means they offer numbers to advertisers that measure output, but don’t really measure effectiveness. Traditional media uses the broadcast (one-way) communication model which tends to overlook the questions of whether expensive print media ads are: 1) actually noticed by a reader, and if noticed, 2) do the ads increase sales? The analogy that print media has lived by: if you throw enough goo at a wall something will stick. It was a model of business that worked because there was no better alternative. No one had any reason to believe it would ever change.

The New World of Media Newspapers were the first to feel the effects of the Internet. By the new millennium people were bypassing them and linking directly to news websites. Soon circulation dropped, and once circulation dropped then advertising revenue dropped. Next to go was the newspaper’s major money-maker; classified advertising. It was swept away almost overnight with the appearance of websites like Craig’s List. By 2003, newspaper revenue began a free-fall and hardest hit were investor owned newspaper groups that could not afford to lose money because they were already being trimmed to the bone in order to harvest higher dividends.

Magazine sales of Time, Newsweek and US World News Report

Magazines didn’t really see a major impact until blogs and Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter began to dominate the world of information and communication. People began to speak for themselves and listen to raw information from sources that weren’t filtered through a small group of editors. The magazine staff saw this as heresy. How dare the public read stories that they haven’t approved! They believed that the role of the publishing world was to decide what the public should know and the Internet was full of information that they hadn’t approved.

Comfortable in their arrogance, magazine publishers thought they would survive where newspapers failed, but in 2007, popular magazines like Time and Newsweek had the floor drop out from under them. Advertisers had discovered that people were basing purchasing decisions on what other people were saying about the products/services in the Social Media. Mass advertising was losing the battle to customer reviews and person-to-person online interactions. For the first time magazines had a competing alternative that exposed the fallacy of mass advertising.

The Rotarian Meets 2010 Highly specialized magazines and membership magazines have been insulated from the fate of the rest of the print media world, but it really is a matter of time until all print media see the reality of Social Media. The official magazine of Rotary is no different and the first sign of change happened two weeks ago.

During the last week in April, Rotary International convened the 2010 Council on Legislation. This is a body of senior administrative Rotarians (all past District Governors) that review and approve changes to Rotary International policies. Among the over 200 proposed changes was a request to allow the internal Rotary magazine to be offered in an electronic format option and allow members to cancel the delivered hard copy magazine. No big deal, right? But it is a big deal.

The Rotarian Magazine is a monthly magazine with a guaranteed circulation. Every member of Rotary is required to receive it. That allows Rotary International (RI) to reach every member once a month, but it also allows RI to guarantee circulation to advertisers. No one really knows what percentage of Rotary members actually read the magazine, but in the world of advertising it is circulation that counts and it seems certain people at the 2010 Council on Legislation knew an electronic version could drastically reduce the circulation of hard copy of The Rotarian.

An electronic option is a bigger issue than just circulation numbers. This issue of electronic versus print is an example of the bigger conflict between traditional print media and Internet media. Beyond advertising revenue this is an issue of format and content.

Magazine Format versus Electronic Format Currently, The Rotarian is a 64 or 80 page magazine (80 pages when there is a multiple page supplement). The first 30 or so pages are a mix of departments and Rotary and non-Rotary advertisements. At about page 30 the magazine starts three or four ad-free feature articles for the next 21 to 26 pages. The remainder of the magazine is small item articles, classified ads, and mostly Rotary related ads. This is a format that works for print media.

The two significant characteristics of The Rotarian print version that conflict with most models of electronic media are: 1) ads intermixed with the substance of the magazine and 2) long articles. In the most recent edition of The Rotarian (May 2010) there is one article that is 18 pages long. Internet-based reading has rejected advertising (called spam) and most information is delivered in three to five paragraphs (except, of course, my blogs which violate all the rules.) Blogs/articles that violate the rules are ignored. Therefore, to be read in an electronic format The Rotarian would have to eliminate the ads and severely trim the articles, which means a print version would either have to change or two different versions would have to be created.

There are two other options. The first is to create a version that would work with the new iPad, but that would mean members would have to purchase an iPad. The second option is to not change the format for the Internet, which would mean that most people would not read it.

Square Peg in a Round Hole In the final analysis, a magazine is based on traditional media concepts and they do not translate to the Internet format. Social Media is focused on connections between people and sharing of ideas. A print magazine is a broadcast of information where no one cares if anyone reads it as long as the circulation numbers are good. But advertisers are getting smarter and stingier about throwing money at broadcast media.

The National Rotarian magazine

The fact is that The Rotarian is living on borrowed time. Eventually, the reality that circulation doesn’t measure anything that is relevant will cause advertisers to focus their efforts (and money) on real connections with real people. Without outside ad revenue the cost to maintain a print publication will force RI to move away from broadcast media and seek better options. The best option will be for RI to create a series of mentored blogs that allow people to read and discuss the Rotary issues that are important to them. Rotary International is already experimenting with this through Social Media tools, but there is and will be resistance to giving up traditional media.

Next year will be the centennial celebration of The Rotarian magazine. It may also be the celebration of the end of an era.

Most Rotarians know that Paul Harris was the Father of Rotary. He is credited with the idea for the club and today he is ‘Mr. Rotary’ to millions of Rotarians. The Chicago Rotary club was an immediate success and it achieved all that Paul Harris could have hoped for and maybe even more than he had imagined.

However, by 1909, several other business men in other cities had heard of the new Chicago Rotary club and they wanted to know more about the organization. Paul Harris was receiving letters from all over the United States asking about creating new clubs and when the second club was chartered on November 12, 1908 (San Francisco) it created an explosion of interest and letters came pouring in to Paul’s office.

The New Face of Rotary as the Organization Transforms

The work to charter new Rotary clubs brought new challenges and tasks for the organization. Chicago Club President ‘Red’ Ramsey asked a member, Chesley R. Perry, if he would take charge of club expansion or ‘extension’. Ches, as he was known by his friends, accepted. It would change the course of Rotary.

Chesley R. Perry

Ches Perry was not one of the original charter members,…not even close. He joined Rotary in late June of 1908, over three years after the organization was born. When he was asked to take on the leadership of chartering new clubs he had been a Rotarian for just over a year, but he was the right person for the job. Ches took on his task as if Rotary was his idea. At the end of his work day he would go over to Paul Harris’ office and work long hours with Paul responding to all the letters coming in from potential club organizers. Paul and Ches became a team that laid the groundwork for what was to come.

Within months after the San Francisco club was chartered four more clubs were organized in Oakland, CA; Seattle, WA; and Los Angeles, CA. By the fifth anniversary of Rotary (February 23, 1910) 12 clubs had been chartered but each club was an independent organization that adopted the Chicago Rotary club’s Constitution. The first club had been the central focus and contact for all the new clubs, but there was not a unifying organization. Now a new dilemma surfaced.

The Chicago club had become the primary entity for a rapidly growing group of Rotary clubs, but that was not the purpose of the original club. It was time to create an umbrella entity that would act on behalf of all existing clubs and qualify new clubs. It was decided to hold a convention of all Rotary clubs to establish a national Rotary organization. The task of planning a three-day convention fell to largely Ches Perry.

Years later Paul would tell of the role Ches played in his role in the fledgling Rotary organization:

“…Ches did not want to be told what to do; he did it. He did more work than I in the calling of the first convention, a great deal more….”

Like so many great Rotarians, Ches didn’t hesitate to act when action was needed.

What followed was a transformation of Rotary. The first convention was held on August 15-17, 1910 and the Rotary clubs immediately elected Ches to be the chairman of the convention. The representatives then established the National Association of Rotary Clubs of America. Paul was elected as its first President and soon after the convention the new Board of Directors asked a young 33 year-old Ches to temporarily serve as Secretary. He accepted and then served in that role until 1942 when he retired at age 65.

Ches created the Rotarian magazine (then called the National Rotarian) that every member now receives monthly. When Paul took a ten-year absence from Rotary in 1912, it was Ches that kept the organization moving forward. It may be that someone else would have stepped into the role instead of Ches and kept the main cog of the Rotary organization well oiled and in motion, but it seems that Ches was exactly the right person at exactly the right time.

As we approached the Centennial of the first Rotary Convention, let’s remember the person who cared and nurtured our organization during its most formative years: Chesley R. Perry.

Is the fight against polio too narrow? A Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article by Robert A. Guth suggests that Bill Gates, a recent champion of eradicating polio, and other major players in the polio fight are reconsidering the focus on eradicating one disease in favor of a broader based approach.

Since the 1980’s Rotarians have been closely involved in the attempt to eradicate polio with the belief that it would be accomplished by the year 2000. But that didn’t happen despite major efforts of Rotary International, the World Health Organization (WHO), UNICEF, and our own Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Polio Worldwide Cases

By the year 2000 the new cases of polio were down to less than a 1000, and the hope was that a strong second effort would eliminate polio. For the last ten years millions of dollars have been raised to accomplish the goal and in the past few years the Bill Gates Foundation has joined the effort. Despite all the dedicated effort we are no closer to eradication than we were in 2000, in fact, we may be farther behind.

However, there is ample evidence that the money and effort spent over the last ten years have not been in vain. When efforts have been halted due to political and/or religious issues the number of new cases skyrockets, and not just in the local region. It is no exaggeration to say that a polio outbreak in the United States is only 14 hours away. So are we locked in a never-ending battle with polio?

That is part of the reason the major players in the fight against polio are considering a different strategy. Polio is able to keep a foothold in the world, in part, because of larger health issues in many countries. A lack of clean water, proper treatment of human waste, poor health care, and other diseases that weaken human resistance, all create an environment where polio can thrive. If we can improve the health standards in rest of the world we can not only make progress against eradicating polio, but also deal a blow to a wide range of diseases that have plagued those who are least able to fight back.

According to the WSJ article, next month the nations of the WHO will be asked to vote on a revised strategy. The battle against polio will be remain at the center of the strategy, but additional efforts to improve health in affected regions will be part of the effort. The hope is to choke off the conditions that allow polio to breed.

It will be a big challenge as the polio fight is currently $1.2 billion short in meeting the budget for the next three years; however, the risk of not taking action could be much more expensive for all of us.

When Congress was considering giving survival loans to American car manufacturers it was interesting to see the reaction of the American public. There were calls by many to let the car manufacturers fail even if it meant forcing hundreds of thousands of Americans out of a job. This is a great study in Public Relations, or the lack of it. The American auto industry spends millions of dollars to advertise. From a standpoint of ‘publicity’ they have one of the largest shares of advertising power of all the industries in America.

But while the auto industry may be giants in ‘publicity’, they suck at Public Relations. How bad do you have to be at Public Relations to have your customers and potential customers wanting to see you fail? A key component to Public Relations is understanding your ‘public image’ and that involves looking at your organization as an ‘outsider.’ The auto industry either was blissfully ignorant of their public image, or just didn’t care. It’s an easy mistake to make, but it’s almost always a fatal error.

A Rotarian sees our organization from an inside view. She or he typically understands and accepts the purpose of Rotary and values the organization as fulfilling a significant role in her or his life, as well as in the local and world communities. Whether it is by design or by accident, the leadership of the Rotary Club creates an internal public relations message that is communicated both actively and passively to the membership. From that internal message the member forms an attitude and opinion of what Rotary means to them.

However, when discussing the positive and negative aspects the Club’s public image we must ignore everything that we have learned from the internal message and put ourselves in the place of the person who knows nothing about Rotary. This is a critical step if we are to understand the strengths and weaknesses of our external public relations message.

In fact, the issue goes farther than assuming a person knows nothing about Rotary because in many cases people have heard of Rotary and they have a skewed and/or false impression of the organization. The person who is not a member of Rotary either:

Doesn’t know about Rotary

Knows, but doesn’t understand the purpose of Rotary

Has a false and/or misleading impression of Rotary and therefore doesn’t believe that the organization to be worthwhile

Knows and understands the purpose of Rotary, but doesn’t want to participate in the organization for some reason

Of these four reasons, the first three require additional information for the person to make an informed decision about participating in, and/or supporting Rotary club’s programs and projects.

Making Clubs More Accessible

The challenge is to somehow make more information available to the public about Rotary, the Rotary club, and our purpose as a service organization. We can do this through one-on-one contact, which is a valuable tool; however, even with a one-on-one contact the person is seeing Rotary through the eyes of one Rotarian and that member may not have all the information needed for the person to make an informed decision about the purpose and value of Rotary. Even attending a club meeting will not provide enough information for a person to understand why Rotary might be an organization that could meet her or his personal needs.

In addition to one-on-one contact, we can also purchase advertising and send out public service announcements to inform the general public of the scope and purpose of Rotary; however, people may be exposed to the message for only a few seconds, which may create more questions than answers.

The problem is that we need to make information about a Rotary Club more accessible. This would be hard under normal circumstances, but at the same time we are looking to ramp up Public Relations to make Clubs more accessible, the world of communication and information technology is undergoing a metamorphosis.

Communication 2010: Not Your Father’s, but, Your Children’s Internet.

By 1995, it was clear that the Internet, and websites in particular, were going to become a valuable business tool, but to find a company’s website you typically had to know the web address. By early in the new century, Google had created a search engine that was so effective, it began to replace phone books and print advertising as tools to market and provide information about an organization.

In addition to websites, the explosion of new social networks like Facebook and Twitter have changed the landscape of Marketing and Public Relations. Traditional methods of communicating information are being replaced with an Internet media that is so rapid that even oppressive governments find it difficult to keep pace and silence their citizens.

The changes in information communication have happened so fast that a ten year-old child in 2000 has seen the birth and rise of Google; the Blackberry; text messaging; MySpace; Facebook, Twitter, and all the other Social Media. That ten year-old child of 2000 is now a twenty year-old adult in 2010 and they have seen newspapers and magazines first falter, then collapse as the new media displaces slow and expensive with fast and inexpensive.

Accessibility is the Alpha and Omega of Public Relations in 2010

A Rotary Club exists for one and one half hours once a week. The Club is inaccessible to most of the public the remaining 166.5 hours of the week. To become more accessible we must bypass yesterday’s traditional methods for communication and information sharing that are no longer viable options as effective Public Relations tools. Clubs must learn to use communication methods that will allow accessibility to the public using today’s technology and we must be prepared to change our methods in order to adapt to new technologies.

While a Club website is hardly a new idea, many clubs fail to have even this basic Public Relations tool. The Club website creates a 24/7/365 presence that allows it to be accessible to anyone in the world. The Club website is the ultimate membership recruitment tool as it can offer a full explanation of the club, and its projects and programs. In addition, the website can give an interested person direct access to someone who can help them take the next step to becoming a member. An updated and dynamic Club website can no longer be considered an option for any Club that seeks to remain relevant in the community. It is absolutely essential for successful external Public Relations.

A great example of a Rotary Club website is the Rotary Club of Reno New Generations. It has a great look, and it has several functions that use Social Media tools.

It is easy to overlook how critical Public Relations can be to a Club’s survival, but for every Club that is scratching their heads over why recruiting new members is so difficult, take a hard look at your Club website…or lack of one.